Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe Boster who wrote (903)	4/21/1998 3:08:00 PM
From: GULL	Respond to of 7235

Hi Joe: I agree with all you sentiments. I also note with dismay that not a single fact had been rebutted?? Names,dates and correspondence mentioned by INFOMAN can be confirmed or denied by SUF. An informative response would have allayed a lot of uncertainty rather than a long winded lecture on various definitions on libel etc...

To: Joe Boster who wrote (903)	4/21/1998 3:53:00 PM
From: Goalie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Hello Joe: With respect to your question...< "Who is GULL, Sans Souci, Goalie, Tomato, Factfinder, INFOMAN, etc? Do they represent the Company, the shareholders or is it the same person talking to his/her book?" > The big difference is that we do not represent a company or heirs, and our comments do not involve spreading potentially actionable statements. We comment and exchange views about a stock we invest in. The author(ess?) of the comments we refer to makes allegations that have very serious implications -- yet offering no verification other than a fake signature. Newspapers in Canada take the view that if your letter to the editor is not validated, the letter is not printed. Of course, the web is different. My view is, if you want to defame somebody, then have enough courage to put your name to such allegations and don't hide behind anonymity. Those of us who use aliases -- here I am speaking for myself only -- use it because of other reasons, and not because we want to dodge our responsibilities as contributors to a valuable forum for exchange of information. BTW, in a possible libel suit, the alias won't protect the individual in Canada where the libel was published. I also note with interest that GULL and INFOMAN joined recently only to participate in the SUF thread; GULL in March, and INFOMAN on April 20th. They have not contributed to any other thread. I have to ask the question -- why comment only on SUF? Do they have an agenda? If so, what is it? Do tell us. My agenda is transparent - I want to make money on my investments, thank you. I study companies, etc. and I listen and evaluate comments by others so that I can make intelligent decisions about my investments. Isn't that your goal too, Joe? What's their agenda...? Perhaps they work in the same law office in S.A......? Joe, don't be disheartened; SUF is good value and you will be rewarded. Regards. Goalie.